• READ BEFORE POSTING!
    • If posting a video, please post HERE, unless it is a video as part of an advertisement and then post it in this section.
    • If replying to threads please remember this is the Promotion area and the person posting may not be open to feedback.

watch The Grand Panopticon

I'm not quite sure how I feel about the ending. I did very much like the smart monologue of the agent and the build-up. Nice work.
 
My feeling is that we do not want to be overly judgemental or too nitpicky when it comes to analyzing short films. My impression is that when it comes to short films (rather necessarily so) a lot of latitude ought to be granted.

On the other hand, when it came to the
sudden reversal of fortunes at the end of
The Grand Panopticon I felt cheated. Whenever I dare to presume to review someone's film here in the Showcase, mind you, I try to listen more to my feelings, how I felt or how I reacted on an emotional or a visceral level, than on an intellectual level, or with an intellectual analysis. So, I think that my most honest response regarding how I felt seeing The Grand Panopticon's ending was that I felt cheated. Yeah, I don't know if it fits exactly the context of your film, but the ending immediately made me feel that a
deus ex machina (or something similar) had occured
.
 
Last edited:
Great crit! Thank you for that, Rich. But let me try to point some things out, maybe then you'll feel less cheated.

I'm not sure if you noticed because it's very subtle, but I purposely break "the fourth wall" on several different occasions. When the NSA agent (Ron) delivers the line, "it is YOU who enforces the grand illusion", right as he says the word "you", he looks dead into the camera. The second time it happens, is when we get a break from the conversation, and suddenly we're viewing the two of them in the same shot, from a distance, but the shot is blurred. In my mind, that symbolizes us (the viewer) watching these two men, but not really having a clear understanding of what's going on. The last and final time the fourth wall is broken, is at the very end, when the agent is finally taken away, the very last shot is the prisoner looking at the camera, as if he knows something that we don't. And maybe he does, or maybe he doesn't, that's for you to decide. But the key point is, he could "better the world", or he could do exactly what the agent predicts, and over time become an agent himself.

Another thing to spot, is when the agent says, "The world's full of recycled ideas. There've been people just like you, that've sat in that chair just like you." That's a hint that says, him and whatever agency he's working for, have wronged a lot of people... including the people that work right under his nose, hence why his own men turn on him. Think about that one scene in Fight Club, when Edward Norton's character takes that rich bastard into the bathroom and tells him, "Look, the people you are after are the people you depend on. We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances. We guard you while you sleep. Do not... FUCK with us." It's kind of like that.

What the NSA agent fails to understand, is that he himself has fallen to the same system he's blabbering on about. He talks like he's God, but at the end we figure out that's not really case (lol), because he is also a prisoner.

I hope that clears up some things.
 
Last edited:
Man I think this could be great. Couple things: Some of the camera work seemed a bit random. Like it didn't flow with the scene. The delivery of the monologue was monotonous. There was no change in his voice. And his breaks in lines became predictable, and then kinda irksome.

The ending. There are too many really small clues your giving us for such a short film. Maybe it would have been easier to accept if the agent had, trough his monologue, convinced himself that the prisoner was right. To me, it seemed it didn't build to that, and was kinda sudden and harsh.

Like I said before, I thik this could be great, and it might be worth a revisit, when you have more time.
 
Usually I can let it slide, but the actor for the NSA agent was cast far too young.

He's delivering a speech that carries the gravitas of ages in it, but sure as heck doesn't look or sound the part.

I think a bit more time spent on casting would have helped sell the short.

I rather like it, as is... just sayin' it missed a few notes.
 
Man I think this could be great. Couple things: Some of the camera work seemed a bit random. Like it didn't flow with the scene. The delivery of the monologue was monotonous. There was no change in his voice. And his breaks in lines became predictable, and then kinda irksome.

I agree, but that was his first time acting and my second time directing. Plus, I wasn't paying him and we only had a few hours to shoot. He was really focused on remembering his lines, and I didn't want to add on more pressure by being a dick. I wouldn't have been so forgiving if I was paying him.

The ending. There are too many really small clues your giving us for such a short film. Maybe it would have been easier to accept if the agent had, trough his monologue, convinced himself that the prisoner was right. To me, it seemed it didn't build to that, and was kinda sudden and harsh.

What "would've been easier to accept"? "Convince himself that the prisoner was right" about what? I'm not sure what you mean.

As for the sudden harshness, that's exactly what I was going for. The prisoner "seeks revenge by fire",
which he gets, in a harsh manner.
Thus answering the agent's question: Let's say you get your Shangri-la. How will you keep your people content? Don't you think if one of them goes against the 'natural order', you'd have to 'remove' them?

And the prisoner's answer is:
"Yes, you would have to 'remove' them. In fact, we're removing you right now! See ya later!" He doesn't literally say that, but his actions do.

Bottom line is: they were both right.


Like I said before, I thik this could be great, and it might be worth a revisit, when you have more time.

Definitely! There's always room for improvement.
 
Last edited:
How to make it easier to accept?? The best thing I can do is give a couple examples. One would be a short story, End Game by J.G. Ballard. It has this "self-turning" of a character we're talking about. Or maybe even 1984, where Winston turns himself into a "rebel".
 
How to make it easier to accept?? The best thing I can do is give a couple examples. One would be a short story, End Game by J.G. Ballard. It has this "self-turning" of a character we're talking about. Or maybe even 1984, where Winston turns himself into a "rebel".

I love 1984! I see what you mean now.
 
Back
Top